IWMI vs. ARMW

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

IWMI (NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF) and ARMW (Roundhill ARM WeeklyPay ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.51 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IWMI charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for ARMW.

Performance

IWMI vs. ARMW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI) and Roundhill ARM WeeklyPay ETF (ARMW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWMI achieves a 18.49% return, which is significantly lower than ARMW's 184.82% return.

IWMI

• 1D: 1.20%
• 1M: 0.94%
• 6M: 12.72%
• YTD: 18.49%
• 1Y: 33.64%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.35%

ARMW

• 1D: 21.87%
• 1M: -13.39%
• 6M: 202.81%
• YTD: 184.82%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ARMW Roundhill ARM WeeklyPay ETF	$3.27M	$4.47M	$4.19M
IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF	$18.07M	$19.78M	$18.17M

IWMI vs. ARMW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF	18.49%	2.95%
ARMW Roundhill ARM WeeklyPay ETF	184.82%	-41.28%

Correlation

The correlation between IWMI and ARMW is 0.51, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 23, 2025	0.51

IWMI vs. ARMW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWMI	ARMW
Technology	19.1%	18.0%
Industrials	18.0%	-
Healthcare	16.3%	-
Financial Services	15.5%	-
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	-
Real Estate	5.9%	-
Energy	5.3%	-
Basic Materials	4.7%	-
Utilities	2.8%	-
Communication Services	2.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	-

Return for Risk

IWMI vs. ARMW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IWMI

IWMI Risk / Return Rank: 87
IWMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
IWMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
IWMI Omega Ratio Rank: 83
IWMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
IWMI Martin Ratio Rank: 91

ARMW

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IWMI vs. ARMW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF (IWMI) and Roundhill ARM WeeklyPay ETF (ARMW). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	IWMI	ARMW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.22	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.10	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.02	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.56	—	—

Drawdowns

IWMI vs. ARMW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWMI drawdown since its inception was -23.88%, smaller than the maximum ARMW drawdown of -56.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWMI and ARMW.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWMI	ARMW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.88%	-56.50%	+32.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.40%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-42.68%	+42.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.86%	-27.39%	+23.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IWMI	ARMW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.93%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.73%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.34%	98.62%	-83.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.67%	98.62%	-80.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.67%	98.62%	-80.95%

IWMI vs. ARMW - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWMI has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than ARMW's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWMI vs. ARMW - Dividend Comparison

IWMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.50%, less than ARMW's 54.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ARMW Roundhill ARM WeeklyPay ETF	54.31%	16.38%	0.00%
IWMI NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF	13.50%	14.05%	8.78%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWMI and ARMW in my portfolio?

IWMI and ARMW have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IWMI or ARMW?

On fees, IWMI is cheaper at 0.68% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWMI or ARMW?

IWMI is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for ARMW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWMI or ARMW?

ARMW has the higher dividend yield at 54.31%, compared with 13.50% for IWMI.

What is the main difference between IWMI and ARMW?

They also come from different issuers: Neos and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for IWMI and 0.99% for ARMW.